Most Recent FO Features

This week: a bad coach gets paid, then insulted; a bad quarterback gets optimistic; another bad quarterbcak gets a cunning plan; a bad play gets Matt Ryan irked; a bad play gets burned; and Jets and Raiders fans get drunk.

Most Recent Extra Points

Varsity Numbers: Checking the Rankings

by Bill Connelly

Every few weeks this season, it is a good idea to check in on how the S&P+ rankings are coming together. Clearly it is early enough in the season that first, as with FEI, preseason projections are still playing a decent-sized role, and second, one good or bad game could alter a team's rating pretty significantly. That said, we're going to dive in nonetheless.

S&P+

As you may recall from previous editions of Varsity Numbers, the S&P+ rating is made up three components:

S&P+ is designed to measure efficiency (Success Rates) and explosiveness (PPP), adjusted for strength of schedule ("+"). As you would expect three games in, the limited schedule is going to contribute significantly to a team's rating, but that is one of the reasons preseason projections are still being used for 50% of the ranking at this point. Projections were determined using similar factors as those used for FEI projections (five-year history, returning starters, etc.), along with some of the turnover figures discussed here. With more years of data (by the offseason, there should be complete play-by-play for at least 2005-09, and maybe 2004 as well), more factors can be taken into account, hopefully creating a very useful, accurate system of projections.

In theory, if the projections are any good, they level out some of the extremes in the three-week raw numbers. But with such a small sample size, these early rankings should be used more for simply figuring out who may be overlooked or underrated (in terms of national perception) instead of truly ranking all 120 teams in terms of performance.

So without further adieu, here is your Top 120 FBS teams. Listed below are the following measures:

These numbers do not take into account South Carolina's win over Mississippi Thursday.

Estimated S&P+ Rankings After Week 3

S&P+Rk

Team

Conference

Est.S&P+

Off. S&P+Rk

Def. S&P+Rk

S&PMargin (Rk)

1

Florida (3-0)

SEC

142.1

1

8

+0.665 (1)

2

USC (2-1)

Pac-10

129.7

4

6

+0.257 (26)

3

Ohio State (2-1)

Big Ten

128.2

10

13

+0.146 (47)

4

Penn State (3-0)

Big Ten

126.7

11

5

+0.642 (3)

5

Texas (3-0)

Big 12

124.8

38

25

+0.163 (44)

6

Oklahoma (2-1)

Big 12

123.3

9

12

+0.395 (13)

7

Alabama (3-0)

SEC

123.3

2

9

+0.567 (4)

8

LSU (3-0)

SEC

121.6

45

26

+0.271 (23)

9

Georgia (2-1)

SEC

120.2

64

21

+0.034 (69)

10

Oklahoma State (2-1)

Big 12

119.3

29

22

+0.069 (60)

11

Miami-FL (2-0)

ACC

119.1

41

15

+0.411 (9)

12

Boise State (3-0)

WAC

118.3

46

7

+0.273 (21)

13

TCU (2-0)

MWC

117.2

6

18

+0.643 (2)

14

Tennessee (1-2)

SEC

117.2

32

3

+0.201 (37)

15

Clemson (2-1)

ACC

117.0

95

1

+0.120 (50)

16

Oregon (2-1)

Pac-10

116.2

7

10

+0.021 (70)

17

Cincinnati (3-0)

Big East

115.5

13

38

+0.495 (7)

18

Iowa (3-0)

Big Ten

115.0

69

4

+0.201 (36)

19

Missouri (3-0)

Big 12

114.9

25

27

+0.279 (18)

20

Ole Miss (2-0)

SEC

113.8

27

23

+0.398 (12)

S&P+Rk

Team

Conference

Est.S&P+

Off. S&P+Rk

Def. S&P+Rk

S&PMargin (Rk)

21

Connecticut (2-1)

Big East

113.7

63

2

+0.115 (52)

22

California (3-0)

Pac-10

113.1

26

20

+0.406 (11)

23

Arkansas (1-1)

SEC

112.7

28

94

+0.182 (42)

24

Nebraska (2-1)

Big 12

111.9

16

31

+0.196 (39)

25

Auburn (3-0)

SEC

111.8

19

24

+0.218 (33)

26

Virginia Tech (2-1)

ACC

111.5

31

16

+0.048 (64)

27

Florida State (2-1)

ACC

110.3

60

37

+0.002 (76)

28

Oregon State (2-1)

Pac-10

110.2

55

40

+0.039 (67)

29

BYU (2-1)

MWC

110.2

22

65

+0.155 (45)

30

UCLA (3-0)

Pac-10

110.1

21

19

+0.110 (53)

31

Texas Tech (2-1)

Big 12

109.6

39

42

+0.257 (27)

32

Georgia Tech (2-1)

ACC

109.2

12

82

-0.010 (78)

33

Utah (2-1)

MWC

108.9

37

14

+0.152 (46)

34

South Florida (3-0)

Big East

108.4

33

61

+0.506 (6)

35

Wisconsin (3-0)

Big Ten

108.4

40

45

+0.296 (17)

36

West Virginia (2-1)

Big East

108.3

14

41

+0.297 (16)

37

Boston College (2-1)

ACC

108.3

77

39

+0.305 (15)

38

Pittsburgh (3-0)

Big East

107.7

43

17

+0.409 (10)

39

Virginia (0-3)

ACC

107.4

34

36

-0.057 (88)

40

Troy (1-2)

Sun Belt

106.7

17

11

+0.040 (66)

S&P+Rk

Team

Conference

Est.S&P+

Off. S&P+Rk

Def. S&P+Rk

S&PMargin (Rk)

41

Southern Miss (3-0)

Conference USA

106.2

36

72

+0.273 (22)

42

Kansas (3-0)

Big 12

105.6

47

100

+0.525 (5)

43

Tulsa (2-1)

Conference USA

105.3

90

101

+0.127 (49)

44

Michigan (3-0)

Big Ten

105.0

75

32

+0.260 (25)

45

Wake Forest (2-1)

ACC

104.9

52

30

+0.001 (77)

46

Michigan State (1-2)

Big Ten

104.3

51

47

+0.197 (38)

47

Minnesota (2-1)

Big Ten

104.0

59

43

-0.033 (84)

48

South Carolina (2-1)

SEC

103.8

5

75

+0.170 (43)

49

Baylor (1-1)

Big 12

103.7

3

57

+0.084 (58)

50

North Carolina (3-0)

ACC

103.1

18

59

+0.233 (30)

51

Nevada (0-2)

WAC

102.8

80

89

-0.264 (111)

52

Maryland (1-2)

ACC

102.7

72

80

-0.184 (106)

53

Fresno State (1-2)

WAC

102.1

23

73

+0.054 (63)

54

Arizona (2-1)

Pac-10

101.6

53

53

+0.105 (54)

55

Navy (1-2)

Independent

101.2

24

60

-0.028 (83)

56

Houston (2-0)

Conference USA

100.4

42

97

+0.455 (8)

57

Notre Dame (2-1)

Independent

100.1

15

67

+0.095 (55)

58

Northwestern (2-1)

Big Ten

100.0

74

58

+0.183 (41)

59

Stanford (2-1)

Pac-10

99.6

8

105

+0.184 (40)

60

Rutgers (2-1)

Big East

99.5

78

102

-0.111 (97)

S&P+Rk

Team

Conference

Est.S&P+

Off. S&P+Rk

Def. S&P+Rk

S&PMargin (Rk)

61

Illinois (1-1)

Big Ten

99.5

83

90

+0.279 (19)

62

Purdue (1-2)

Big Ten

99.3

30

44

+0.045 (65)

63

N.C. State (2-1)

ACC

98.0

115

52

+0.277 (20)

64

Washington (2-1)

Pac-10

97.7

54

63

-0.092 (93)

65

Vanderbilt (1-2)

SEC

97.6

98

66

+0.003 (75)

66

Hawaii (2-1)

WAC

97.0

49

62

+0.238 (29)

67

East Carolina (1-2)

Conference USA

96.7

92

35

-0.199 (108)

68

Syracuse (1-2)

Big East

95.8

57

28

-0.099 (96)

69

Kentucky (2-0)

SEC

95.3

79

77

+0.250 (28)

70

Louisville (1-1)

Big East

95.2

84

117

+0.205 (35)

71

Colorado (1-2)

Big 12

94.7

85

76

-0.153 (104)

72

Rice (0-3)

Conference USA

94.6

88

71

-0.496 (117)

73

UAB (1-2)

Conference USA

94.2

61

70

-0.037 (86)

74

Northern Illinois (2-1)

MAC

94.2

87

54

-0.027 (82)

75

Texas A&M (2-0)

Big 12

94.0

71

78

+0.216 (34)

76

Middle Tennessee St. (2-1)

Sun Belt

93.6

20

95

+0.063 (62)

77

Memphis (1-2)

Conference USA

92.7

91

51

-0.062 (89)

78

Wyoming (1-2)

MWC

92.6

107

46

-0.150 (103)

79

Marshall (2-1)

Conference USA

92.0

68

99

-0.143 (100)

80

Kansas State (1-2)

Big 12

91.7

81

74

+0.015 (73)

S&P+Rk

Team

Conference

Est.S&P+

Off. S&P+Rk

Def. S&P+Rk

S&PMargin (Rk)

81

Utah State (0-2)

WAC

91.4

44

84

-0.226 (109)

82

Arizona State (2-0)

Pac-10

91.3

119

55

+0.386 (14)

83

Bowling Green (1-2)

MAC

91.0

93

29

-0.096 (94)

84

Louisiana Tech (1-2)

WAC

90.4

104

88

-0.145 (102)

85

Central Florida (2-1)

Conference USA

90.2

105

33

+0.014 (74)

86

San Jose State (0-3)

WAC

89.6

108

34

-0.491 (116)

87

San Diego State (1-2)

MWC

89.3

94

103

-0.015 (79)

88

Temple (0-2)

MAC

89.1

56

69

-0.083 (92)

89

Colorado State (3-0)

MWC

88.6

58

79

+0.220 (32)

90

Mississippi State (2-1)

SEC

88.5

82

56

+0.064 (61)

91

UL-Monroe (1-2)

Sun Belt

88.5

50

120

+0.117 (51)

92

Indiana (3-0)

Big Ten

88.5

97

106

+0.145 (48)

93

Duke (1-2)

ACC

88.4

96

50

-0.082 (91)

94

SMU (2-1)

Conference USA

88.4

102

111

+0.088 (57)

95

UNLV (2-1)

MWC

88.2

62

96

+0.093 (56)

96

Toledo (1-2)

MAC

88.1

86

104

-0.169 (105)

97

Washington State (1-2)

Pac-10

87.6

110

64

-0.410 (114)

98

Iowa State (2-1)

Big 12

87.5

48

114

+0.069 (59)

99

Central Michigan (2-1)

MAC

87.4

99

108

+0.020 (71)

100

Akron (1-2)

MAC

87.3

89

83

-0.119 (98)

S&P+Rk

Team

Conference

Est.S&P+

Off. S&P+Rk

Def. S&P+Rk

S&PMargin (Rk)

101

Army (2-1)

Independent

87.2

113

68

+0.037 (68)

102

UL-Lafayette (2-1)

Sun Belt

86.9

66

85

+0.017 (72)

103

Florida Atlantic (0-2)

Sun Belt

86.5

70

107

-0.479 (115)

104

Air Force (2-1)

Mountain West

85.9

100

86

+0.221 (31)

105

Ohio (2-1)

MAC

85.1

67

87

-0.021 (80)

106

UTEP (1-2)

Conference USA

84.7

101

81

-0.056 (87)

107

Buffalo (1-2)

MAC

84.4

35

116

-0.099 (95)

108

Eastern Michigan (0-3)

MAC

83.8

65

109

-0.251 (110)

109

New Mexico (0-3)

MWC

82.3

120

91

-0.394 (113)

110

Ball State (0-3)

MAC

82.0

103

93

-0.144 (101)

111

Idaho (2-1)

WAC

81.5

106

98

-0.026 (81)

112

Florida International (0-2)

Sun Belt

81.3

109

49

-0.367 (112)

113

Kent State (1-2)

MAC

80.5

112

110

-0.127 (99)

114

Western Michigan (1-2)

MAC

80.4

114

112

-0.186 (107)

115

Arkansas State (1-1)

Sun Belt

79.3

76

92

+0.262 (24)

116

Tulane (0-2)

Conference USA

79.2

116

118

-0.597 (119)

117

North Texas (1-2)

Sun Belt

79.0

73

48

-0.033 (85)

118

Western Kentucky (0-3)

Sun Belt

75.8

111

115

-0.676 (120)

119

New Mexico State (1-2)

WAC

75.8

118

113

-0.077 (90)

120

Miami-OH (0-3)

MAC

74.1

117

119

-0.516 (118)

Surprises and Thoughts

Penn State has so effectively blown out the cupcakes on their schedule that their ranking increased despite strength of schedule.

Seven of the Top 10 are from either the SEC or Big 12. No real surprise there.

Thanks to projections and the team's decent performance against third-ranked Ohio State, USC has not fallen far despite the loss to Washington. Future performance and schedule adjustments will even that later.

Clearly Oregon is still benefiting from its preseason projections. The Ducks only have a couple of weeks to start achieving before their ranking falls precipitously.

Five lowest-ranked undefeated teams: Indiana (92), Colorado State (89), Arizona State (82), Texas A&M (75), Kentucky (69). Clearly if they keep winning, they will each show some upward mobility.

At the very least, this exercise should give you insight for some of the S&P+ picks made during the weekly Seventh Day Adventures article.

F/+

In this summer's Football Outsiders Almanac, there was one more figure shared with FEI and S&P+. It was the combination of the two, known in the book as F/+. For 2008, both FEI and S&P+ had correlations of about 0.83-0.85 to winning percentage. The correlation of F/+ was around 0.88. This makes sense, of course. Both measures have their advantages and disadvantages, and a combination of the two would cancel out some of the outliers.

F/+ Top 20

F/+ Rk

Team

S&P+ Rk

FEI Rk

1

Florida

1

1

2

USC

2

3

3

Ohio State

3

4

4

Texas

5

2

5

Oklahoma

6

9

6

Alabama

7

10

7

Penn State

4

22

8

Miami

11

7

9

LSU

8

13

10

Clemson

15

11

11

Boise State

12

14

12

Georgia

9

21

13

Auburn

25

5

14

Iowa

18

15

15

Florida State

27

8

16

Virginia Tech

26

12

17

TCU

13

27

18

West Virginia

36

6

19

Oklahoma State

10

33

20

Oregon

16

29

The F/+ measure has been good early on at balancing out the S&P+ infatuation with Penn State, Georgia and TCU, and FEI's love of all things Auburn and West Virginia.

The goal is not simply to use Varsity Numbers as a space for posting weekly S&P+ (or F/+) rankings, but every few weeks (when the column ideas are running a little low ... ahem), checking in on these measures is a good thing. And we're working on weekly updates of both S&P+ and FEI in the FO statistics section

No one's going to mention the utterly ridiculous gap between Florida and the other teams? It's there in FEI as well.

This is why I really, really hope that Penn State doesn't go undefeated and face Florida in the NC game. If Florida keeps playing like this, they're the national champions, and I have no interest in seeing my team be their sacrificial goat.

It's just realism. This isn't necessarily about favoritism: Florida's just playing way better than the rest of college football right now. That's just a fact.

You might say "well, it's like the 2007 NFL season!" but really, it's not. In that case there were signs that the Giants could play at the Patriots level (especially in DVOA, where the postseason Giants put up a DVOA roughly equal to the postseason Patriots). They were just ignored because it was too small a sample size.

Unless something *really* turns around, I don't think there will be any such signs this year. Florida was really good last year, and had an unnatural number of underclassmen. I'm not surprised they're better than the rest of the field, and barring a metric crapton of injuries, I don't think it'll change.

Even the Penn State win over Miami back in the 80s isn't the same. That game, I could believe that Penn State could win. Right now, Penn State vs. Florida? That'd be an easy Fred Edelstein Lock.

The talk around here is that Florida is in real trouble without any wide receivers. Monte Kiffin called a very effective game against them, which could be considered a blueprint for containing them. Right now, I'd take Alabama over them.

"Very effective"? 23 points is average for a football game. The Tennessee/Florida game was also only 8 real drives long: 23 points in 8 drives is a field goal per drive. An offense that can average a field goal per drive is nearly impossible to keep up with.

(That's not to mention the fact that they were within a few yards of scoring another TD.)

I don't think that Tennessee's game plan is anything to be followed. Tennessee forced them to run the ball, and they, uh, did. Ridiculously well. Unless another defense can force them to run the ball and be effective at stopping them, it's not a good game plan.